GERMAN VIEWS IN ADVANCE OF MAJOR ECONOMIES FORUM

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BERLIN 000743 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SENV KGHG PGOV PREL GM SUBJECT: GERMAN VIEWS IN ADVANCE OF MAJOR ECONOMIES FORUM REF: STATE 59852 ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Germany's delegation to the Major Economies Forum (MEF) meeting in Mexico is concerned about raising the prospect of a 2020-2030 midterm compliance window in open session. The head of delegation also shared his dwindling hopes of an agreement in Copenhagen. German interlocutors insist that commitments by developed countries are essential to bringing along the developing countries. They also take issue with arguments comparing levels of effort among Japan, the U.S., and the EU. Germany considers developing countries' clear efforts beyond business as usual emissions a prerequisite for additional financing. A senior staff officer suggested using the G8 as a pulpit from which to articulate U.S. commitments to emissions mitigation, offering suggestions about a possible formulation. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (SBU) On June 12, EMIN presented ref A points to Peter Roesgen, Director for Infrastructure Policy (and top climate advisor) in the Federal Chancellery. On June 17, EMIN also presented the points to Environment State Secretary (Deputy Minister) Matthias Machnig. Concerns about raising 2020-2030 window in MEF open session ¶3. (SBU) Machnig expressed several times his concerns about raising in the MEF open session the "very, very informal" suggestion that he shared with the U.S. delegation about a 2020-2030 window for phased emissions reductions. He feared thatQis would collapse the ambition of many states unless it rigorously cascaded with realistic, clear, and ambitious reductions after 2020. He said that for this approach to have any chance, the proposal would need to be science-based and lead to halving global emissions by 2050, with developed country long-term goals of 80-90% reductions. Machnig said it was his "gut feeling" that it would be dangerous to have a 2020-2030 argument in Mexico. (Comment: Days before our meeting with Machnig, Roesgen observed that Minister Gabriel's suggestion about a staged approach on midterm targets might be helpful. He said that the discussion on this continued inside the government, but that it might allow a mechanism to keep temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius. End Comment.) Growing doubts about an agreement in Copenhagen ¶4. (SBU) Noting that there would be no agreement at the Conference of Parties (COP-15) without the U.S., Machnig guessed that given the time remaining, an agreement is unlikely. He indicated that, as a politician, he had never seen an important compromise come through in five months, and that following the meetings in Italy, that is all the time that would be left. He worried that if the U.S. postpones ambitious commitments, German and European industry and society would lose incentives for the same. The more we put on the table, the more we can ask for ¶5. (SBU) In a theme echoed by Roesgen about planned emissions reductions by developed countries, Machnig said that "the more we put on the table, the more we can ask for" from developing countries. He insisted that developed countries' agreements must be underpinned with measurable, realistic, and ambitious reduction numbers, without imposing additional burdens on developing countries. He said that the developing countries would wait for the U.S. and Europe. On financing, Machnig stressed that developed countries would need to bring money to the fund; he added that the U.S.' planned emissions trading system (ETS) could be a useful revenue source. (Comment: He estimated that the community would require at least USD 10 billion annually in financing. End Comment.) Clarifying criticism of Japanese midterm targets ¶6. (SBU) Machnig sought to clarify his recent criticism about the announced Japanese midterm emissions reduction targets. He volunteered, "I said this for two reasons: one, because it,s true and two, because if I say it about Japan, I don,t have to say it about the US." He made clear that he wants a "close bridge and understanding" with the U.S. Pushback on question of comparability of effort ¶7. (SBU) Asked about the question of the comparability of effort between the U.S. and the EU (from a 2005 base),he noted that the Japanese had suggested the same, with a 15% level of effort. He claimed that if an international agreement were concluded, the assumed EU level of effort of 13% below 2020 would actually be around 24%, far above both the U.S. (Waxman-Markey targets) and Japan. BERLIN 00000743 002 OF 002 Expectations of developing countries ¶8. (SBU) Referring to a gap in the MEF building blocks, Machnig signaled the importance of strong expectations for developing countries, with measurable, reportable, and verifiable targets and national action plans that clearly indicate how far they will go beyond business-as-usual. He said that neither the German Parliament nor the U.S. Congress would approve funding that does not exceed the national action plans. He clarified that although the plans would be quantified, they would remain aspirational. ¶9. (SBU) Asked about recent maximalist demands on the U.S. by India, Roesgen said "they are aware that 40% is not feasible--it's a negotiating position." He added, however, that China and India are different in both their awareness of climate impacts and their independent actions. He observed, "India has a national action plan, but they are in a different economic situation. It is tougher for them to get going and they are more dependent on foreign assistance." Using the G8 as a pulpit ¶10. (SBU) In a separate conversation, Norbert Gorissen, the office director responsible for German MEF preparation at the Environment Ministry, suggested to Econoff that the G8 statement should have some formulation recognizing the importance of mitigating climate change. He said, "identifying numbers would not be necessary--just senior level recognition". He strongly recommended an expression of a commitment to address climate change, noting that it would be a timely demonstration of leadership. He suggested that the U.S. clearly reinforce its accomplishments and plans for the future. Gorissen said, "you may think that everyone is aware of President Obama,s goals on climate, but they are not." ¶11. (SBU) He recommended also identifying the common ground and, above all, avoiding the impression that the U.S. is fighting numerical goals. He said that the U.S. does not need to be defensive on numbers--that it was a mistake the US made last year. He concluded, observing that--based on recent meetings with NGOs--civil society is counting on the G8 for meaningful signals, not the MEF, and that POTUS' involvement would create an optimal opportunity. In a point underscored by each of our interlocutors, Gorissen welcomed the opportunity for POTUS to chair the MEF, and underscored its importance as "one of the last opportunities to get the leaders involved in the process". Welcoming change in the US approach ¶12. (SBU) Acknowledging the recent meeting between the Chancellor and POTUS, Roesgen welcomed the "near u-turn8 on U.S. climate policy." He noted that both sides share an appreciation for the importance of adhering to science in moving forward on climate negotiations. German delegation ¶13. (SBU) Roesgen said that he would attend the MEF in Mexico, and that scheduling problems would keep Environment Minister Gabriel from attending, with Machnig taking the delegation lead. (Comment: According to Environment Ministry staff, Director General Urban Rid will attend, as will Office Director Norbert Gorissen. However, Climate Negotiator Karsten Sach will not attend. End Comment.) Koenig